About your Search

20121112
20121120
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)
't, toure. some complementary things said from an aide close to speaker boehner saying it was a very productive, positive meeting there with the president at the white house. the most interesting thing, though, from the boehner aide was that john boehner believes there is not enough time from now until the end of the year to actually have a grand bargain. there's enough time, though, to put together the framework for what a grand bargain would look like. essentially have the top lines agreed to that by sometime in 2013 you could have both the chambers, the senate and the house, come together on some substantial tax reform, entitlement reform, and get rid of the sort of automatic cuts that we see as a sequester, and the tax increases and have a mechanism you can replace them with. listen to the congressional leaders in their photo op in the white house before thanksgiving that they had today. >> we've put revenue on the table, as long as it's accompanied by significant spending cuts. >> we have a cornerstones of being able to work something out. we're both going to have to give up som
they already agreed to that. i think you heard john boehner say that already. we've had votes in the senate where we've actually gotten rid of tax credits. i think that's a given. and i think the vast majority of americans agree with that. the question is how do you do that and how do you allow taxes to rise at the same time you fix the real problem? and the real problem is uncontrolled entitlement spending and a government that has grown massively. not just under this administration, under republican administration. >> let me turn to senator schumer on this point. >> so you have to approach both sides of it. >> let me turn to senator schumer. i'm going to ask you the same question. if the mandate is compromised, what do democrats have to be prepared to accept as a painful outcome in order to achieve compromise? >> well, i agree with you, the mandate is compromise. that's why we have a divided house and senate. and i think if the house stands for anything it's cut government spending, as tom coburn said, and i think we're going to have to do more of it. we heard the mandate in 2010, where i
directly at odds with house speaker john boehner. >> could you accept a deal that does not include tax rate increases for the wealthy? we've seen talk about a possible compromise that could leave rates the same but cap deductions for high-income earners. is that something that's acceptable? >> no. >> not at all no, way? >> no. the preponderance made it very clear in his campaign that there are not enough -- what you just described is a formula and a blueprint for hampering our future. you cannot go forward -- you have to cut some investments. if you cut too many you are hampering growth, you're hampering education, investments for the future. >> and even thousands of miles away it appears president obama is still focused on those negotiations. while touring a royal monastery with secretary of state clinton in thailand the president was overheard mentioning the budget talks to a monk. the president later clarified his comments -- >> he's not any monk. >> no. >> he has some big i vestments in the stock market. >> he later clarified his comments at a news conference. >> yes, we were working on
-like reaction, not a cliff-like reaction, and the leaders of wall street will help john boehner to make a better deal rather than pressuring him to make a deal that's bad for the economy and the fear that we don't get a deal will lead to getting a deal because the pressure correctly applied. >> the issue here is will we go over the cliff? i stopped saying cliff. sorry. okay, okay. but i think the question is do we get to the grassy gradual slope or not and then level roonlg. this is the first time since 2010 that's obama's had the leverage with republicans and saying there, you mentioned that poll yesterday adding to the leverage because, voters, you think to go over this so-called cliff and referring to the nervousness. who will you blame? >> republicans. >> republicans. that's more leverage of obama on that question and look at. yeah, he didn't draw that red line as krystal said at the beginning but as close to be an absolutist for incomes over $250,000 as he can be. this is an issue that he ran on. this bothers him ruled by republicans two years ago and taxes are not where they should be hist
election? >> no, not at all. in fact, after election day the president, speaker boehner, senate ma minority leader mitch mcconnell all talking about the facecle life, what they were going to do, not going to do, what they wanted to negotiate, not negotiate, but on friday, as news exploded out from the cia thanks to our own andrea mitchell that the president accepted the resignation of the cia director, general david petraeus, all of that -- you have to add that plus all the things you talked about, fiscal cliff, to what the president has to deal with. as you said, no honeymoon, indeed. >> and added to what jonathan just said, julian, there are some concerns over this that this is just the tip of the iceberg. i want to play you something senator feinstein said to andrea mitchell this afternoon. >> this thing came so fast and hard. since then it's been like peeling an onion. every day another peel comes off and you see a whole new dimension to this. so my concern has actually escalated over the last few days. >> it's clear she's suggesting this is going well beyond the realm of a personal mat
to december 29th and dictator obama forced this on us. is that the game mcconnell and boehner play here? >> i think they know that game won't play well. they have to play it. everyone has to take a sacrifice here, and when you do the numbers with america's finances to keep the entitlements entact, if slightly different from today, to keep social security intact and get the economy back and growing, everyone has to take a little bit of a hit, whether it's the private equity guy with his carried interest exclusion and the $750,000 home morn tax deduction, which is completely absurd. that doesn't help the middle class. they all have to happen. if everyone is -- you saw bob corker last week or over the weekend. there are a lot of sensible people out there. i think sensible minds will prevail. this is just a fiscal cliff. it pushes it off to july 4th to be patriotic with an agreement and framework to work towards a big deal. it is only this artificial construct we're talking about now. what we need to get for everybody to be happy and the markets to be happy and the chinese and the japanese and th
that john boehner had with all of you folks saying get in line, we actually have to have a record to run on in 2014. we can't be obstructionists anymore. the american people have spoken in the election, let's do something. newt gingrich, former speaker of the house, failed presidential candidate, giving advice to the republican party, i would advise the republican party to take that with a huge salt lick. >> yeah. >> ashley, you were on the trail covering romney and there for the last days of his candidacy. do you sense now there is supposedly a come to jesus moment happening within the republican party, that the moderate wing will have a strong voice? >> well, i mean one thing you're seeing before the election, before the president won re-election and seemed like leaders in congress were going to be more willing to compromise, governor romney was sounding a bipartisan theme even during the election. even before, some people would argue the president has a mandate, some wouldn't, bipartisanship was what was persuading the most voters on the trail. after the election there's probably goin
.6 trillion of new revenue. boehner had agreed to $800 billion. it's not hard to find $1.2 trillion as a kind of middle ground to that. then you want to have $4 trillion of total deficit reduction, so that leaves $2.8 trillion of spending reductions that have to happen. here's what people miss. we can avoid going over the cliff with the stroke of a pen. they can just extend all this stuff and kick the can down the road. the real question is are we going to have a big deal? are we going to agree on the major spending restraints that we need as well as the tax stuff in order to actually get the deficit under control? and i think the betting on that is less than 50%. i think we have a great shot at it. but it's going to be really, really hard. >> is that the view from wall street, too? they're not totally confident that this is going to happen? >> what you see in the stock market at the moment is that wall street is not totally confident. that's for sure. >> all right. steve, thanks so much. >> pleasure. >>> coming up, independent senator-elect of maine, angus king joins the conversation. he's a
, but it all had to come from spending. the republicans got their way. remember the talks about boehner and the negotiations on the debt ceiling. he got 98% of what he wanted. so the conversation used to be we will cut the deficit through spending cuts. now within the space of a week, the same people, glen hubbard who was romney's chief economic adviser slated to be the federal reserve head if romney had won has an op-ed in the financial times today saying the first thing we should do is focus on more revenues and the way to get that is from capping deductions for the wealthy. so it's extraordinary the shape of the the rhetoric that's coming from republicans in the the last week has really changed a great deal. i think they recognize, even if obama doesn't recognize and even if most centrist democrats don't recognize it, they hold all the cards here. >> so who's the god you're referring to there? >> grover norquist? i'd say it's more a collection of dayties who said the first -- >> but that's the point. republican leaders and some republican thought leaders might be coming around that w
they acted. and the question is whether they'll have the courage of their convictions. speaker boehner appears to be torn by this. mitch mcconnell, on the other hand, appears to be concerned about winning a primary in kentucky. i can only recall his tactics that tried to mug the president, apparently, will continue. so this is a very interesting question. there are clearly people within the republican party who don't want them to be more flexible, who want to go down in flames. and that's the key issue. there are republicans who will be running for re-election for the senate next time pp, republican members of the house who understand they've got to be more flexible. and it's going to be interesting to watch. i hope they will fine the courage to break with the tea party. to date i'm not encouraged. to date the tea party continues to have that veto. >> now, compare this aftermath of an election with 2010, after the midterm election. what is the difference in terms of the political landscape and leverage of the democratic party? >> well, clearly the democratic message won. let me point o
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)